You can't make this claim if you have no insight into the details of the deal and what value was on the table for a FTA element.
But this is also the same argument had every time RA has signed a broadcast deal since 1996... "they would be insane to give up the riches of PayTV for the sake for FTA exposure"... 5 years is a short term sugar hit in the viability of a code or SVOD platform long term
I think this is one of the key issues:
"......every time RA has signed a broadcast deal since 1996...."
It's hard to grow something that's been hidden behind paywalls making it an "exclusive product" for so long. It's probably a key reason why the game is in decline. I agree with your sentiments that RA have taken the short term sugar hit on every occasion and continue to do so.
The consequences of those decisions are clear. The game is struggling, revenue is low, it's a poor product and less people care. Before people jump at the
"revenue is low" noting the increase from Stan, it's likey of more benefit to Stan to exploit and flog the dead donkey by propping it up to support their their platform. They obviously can see they need to chuck in a few extra dollar to keep RA afloat so they got a reasonable product which fills the content quota. We all need to remember that content to broadcasters is disposable. If it doesn't provide some form of return they will cut it. I doubt there is any "goodwill" in this deal.
The key question all sporting codes need to be asking is what is next? Where is our revenue stream? What are we doing with the game to keep fans engaged? So where is the future for Union? So far the only changes are a result of financial realities or partners going in other directions. RA has not made any real decisions other than to chase easy cash that's on offer. Everytime broadcast deals come up RA's answer seems to be just grab the cash again to support the rinse and repeat for the next "x" amount of years. Meanwhile crowds are slowly dropping off,so is the interest in the game.
Bottomline iis its a poor deal IMHO without more FTA. Sponsors know that and that's is where all the teams (nad Union overall) will take the biggest hit! No FTA devalues the brands, so things like jersey's sponsor sponsorship dollars is likely less so the trade off of increased revenue from Stan isn't really that much of an uplift. It's just made it tougher for the franchises in reality as they can't chase decent sponsorship dollars when they are locked behind a paywall.
RA has always had one advantage of the Wallabies over the rival codes that has kept them alive. You can see them bounce from Lions to RWC, to whatever test like sugar hits so they can patch the financial issues. IMHO they have become overly dependent on it and now not only don't know how, but can't compete in an open market with an any domestic products.
The signs of the Wallaby cash cow is going to get learner are looming. The KIwi's are looking elsewhere, including cutting a deal with the SARU to play without us etc, less test with the Nations Cup - which is likely a performanced based return so god help us!
I gotta say, as much as I love the game, reading its 5 more years of
"this" has me thinking it's going to be a tough ask and hard slog to hang on. I don't see what RA will have to offer at the end of this 5 years if anything at all.
And please don't say the games have been good this year. So what? It's such a short flash in the pan, we all know it's likely the a Kiwi final which will be forgotten because in a few weeks, it will, be all about the Wallabies side show and the other codes finals. We will all be what Super Rugby thingy???
Key question most will be asking will be is it worth paying for Stan or not? It's a hefty price for a few weeks of Super Rugby when the wallet is tight.
